Category Archives: U.S. Copyright Office

ImageRights International, the global leader in copyright enforcement services for photo agencies and professional photographers, today announced the launch of a dedicated copyright registration service. For the first time, any photographer or agency can register their images with the United States Copyright Office through ImageRights highly efficient and precise copyright service. Previously, only ImageRights members had access to the service.

ImageRights International, the global leader in copyright enforcement services for photo agencies and professional photographers, today announced the launch of a dedicated copyright registration service. For the first time, any photographer or agency can register their images with the United States Copyright Office through ImageRights highly efficient and precise copyright service. Previously, only ImageRights members had access to the service.

ImageRights has successfully registered more than 600,000 published and unpublished images with the USCO through the service since its launch less than two years ago. The application is quick taking only a couple of minutes, simple with a high tech software that auto fills out the form, and most importantly accurate. With error checking technology, users can be assured their applications were filled out with all necessary information to protect images if an infringement claim is ever needed to be pursued. As a result of the accuracy of its applications and the long-standing relationship it has with the examiners at the USCO, ImageRights’ turnaround is among the fastest on the market, taking only a few weeks on average to receive the registration certificates versus the six to eight months cited on the copyright.gov website. Images can be registered through the website or by using the ImageRights Plugin for Adobe Lightroom.

ImageRights also inscribes the USCO registration number, date, status and deposit copies into the Bitcoin blockchain through their Blockchain Inscription Service. By using SHA2, an asymmetric cryptographic function, ImageRights can safely and automatically convert any file into a representative hash value. An effective and much faster alternative to requesting and paying for copies of the deposit copies from the USCO, the hash can be used as validated proof that a file containing the USCO registration information and images covered by the registration existed at that time and can be a valuable tool for expediting settlement negotiations for infringement claims.

“We strongly believe in photographers and agencies registering their images with the US Copyright Office and wanted to make our service readily available to all,” said Joe G. Naylor, President and CEO of ImageRights. “If the USCO form is not submitted the right way or the correct documentation of your work is not kept on file, photographers can be left vulnerable when pursuing an infringement claim. With our services they are 100% protected.”

For many copyright owners, especially those attempting to register works of visual arts, determining whether a work is published or unpublished for registration purposes is one of the more challenging issues and an impediment to registration. The District Court of the Southern District of New York, in Archie MD, Inc. v. Elsevier, Inc., (No. 16-CV-6614 (JSR), 2017 WL 3601180 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 20, 2017)) recently clarified the standard by which a copyright registration may be considered valid despite containing inaccurate information.

For many copyright owners, especially those attempting to register works of visual arts, determining whether a work is published or unpublished for registration purposes is one of the more challenging issues and an impediment to registration. The District Court of the Southern District of New York, in Archie MD, Inc. v. Elsevier, Inc., (No. 16-CV-6614 (JSR), 2017 WL 3601180 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 20, 2017)) recently clarified the standard by which a copyright registration may be considered valid despite containing inaccurate information.

In 2005, Archie MD, Inc. entered into an Animation License Agreement (“ALA”) with the publisher Elsevier, Inc., under which Elsevier would license Archie’s library of 3-D medical animations for use in its various publications. About two weeks after entering into the ALA, and after Archie had delivered the works to Elsevier, Archie submitted a single copyright registration application for a group of unpublished works. This registration included the work at issue in this case, an animation entitled “Cell Differentiation.” The Copyright Office eventually registered the group of works on August 15, 2005.

In 2014, Archie gave Elsevier notice that it did not intend to renew the ALA, and the ALA expired on July 1, 2015. Archie subsequently file a copyright infringement action against Elsevier, alleging that after the expiration date, Elsevier continued to use hundreds previously licensed animations under the ALA and created unauthorized derivative works.

Both parties filed motions for summary judgment, and the SDNY granted defendant Elsevier’s motion as to all but two of Elsevier’s new animations, on the grounds that Elsevier’s continued use of previously licensed animations did not constitute unauthorized use under the ALA and most of the new animations by Elsevier were not substantially similar to Archie’s animations. As to the remaining claims based on the “Cell Differentiation” animation, Elsevier contended that Archie’s copyright registration in unpublished works was invalid because the work was in fact published, and as a result, the court should dismiss Archie’s claim in its entirety. The court denied Elsevier’s motion for summary judgement as to “Cell Differentiation” on the basis that although the registration for “Cell Differentiation” contained an inaccuracy (namely that the work was unpublished, when it in fact was), this was not fatal to the registration under 17 U.S.C. § 411(b)(1).

Section 411(b)(1) of the U.S. Copyright Act explains that a certificate of registration issued by the Copyright Office satisfies the registration prerequisite for filing a copyright infringement action regardless of the existence of inaccurate information in the certificate “unless— (A) the inaccurate information was included on the application for copyright registration with knowledge that it was inaccurate; and (B) the inaccuracy of the information, if known, would have caused the Register of Copyrights to refuse registration.” To determine whether Archie’s registration failed to satisfy this prerequisite, the court had to answer two questions: first, whether or not “Cell Differentiation” was published or unpublished, and second, if it was published, whether this inaccuracy on the certificate of registration was fatal to the registration’s validity.

As to the first question, the court held that “Cell Differentiation” was in fact published when Archie licensed and delivered the file to Elsevier. Reasoning that Archie’s delivery of the “Cell Differentiation” digital file pursuant to worldwide license to, among other things, distribute “Cell Differentiation” to the public, satisfies the Copyright Act’s definition of publication under 17 U.S.C. § 101 because it constitutes an “offering to distribute copies . . . to a group of persons for purposes of further distribution.” That Elsevier had not yet made any further distributions of “Cell Differentiation” at the time the copyright registration application was filed was irrelevant, because the licensing and delivery of the files was itself an offering.

Because the certificate of registration listed “Cell Differentiation” as unpublished, the court turned to the statute to answer the second question. If an applicant knew its application contained inaccurate information, and if the Register of Copyrights would have refused registration had she known of this inaccurate information, then a subsequent registration certificate is invalid for purposes of filing a copyright infringement action. 17 U.S.C. § 411(b)(2) requires that when an inaccuracy on a certification of registration is discovered, a court must ask the Register of Copyrights “whether the inaccurate information, if known, would have caused the Register of Copyrights to refuse registration.” The Register advised the court that she would have denied the application had she known of the inaccuracy in labeling “Cell Differentiation” unpublished. The key issue was whether Archie knew of the inaccuracy. Because the question of whether licensing a work constitutes publication was “an unsettled legal question at the time” Archie filed its copyright registration application in 2005, the court reasoned that Archie did not know of the inaccuracy. As a result Archi was able to proceed on its copyright claim for the work “Cell Differentiation”.

Publication remains a thorn in copyright owner’s side. While the plaintiff in this case was not considered to have knowledge that its works were published at the time of registration, those filing registrations after the later cases clarifying what is published will no longer have the benefit of this uncertainty. Because the Copyright Office would deny registration of an application with inaccurate information as to the works’ publication status, it is highly recommended that creators register works of visual art before any licensing agreements are signed or files are delivered for further distribution. Otherwise, published works, if photographs, can be registered by the photographer under a group registration of photographs application, but published and unpublished works are still required to be filed separately. Until this requirement is revised, visual artists will continue to face impediments to successful and effortless copyright registration.

The Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act, H.R. 1695, was passed by the House of Representatives by a vote of 378-48 on April 26th, which would now make the Head of the Copyright Office a Presidential appointee. This bill will also give the Copyright Office more autonomy over its budget and its technology as well as its operational procedures (staffing, fees, structure, etc.). DMLA, as a member of the Coalition of Visual Artists, has been supporting this measure as part of our legislative priorities. Read here. The bill now moves onto the Senate for a vote.

“The passage of H.R. bill shows that the House of Representatives sees the importance of moving the Copyright Office into the 21st century” says Cathy Aron, Executive Director of DMLA. “It’s time to give the Copyright Office what it needs to serve the creative industries of our nation effectively. This is a great first step. We look to the Senate to support the bill in an equally bipartisan way”

The importance of Copyright Office reform has been a major focus of our DMLA’s legal outreach over the last few years through our written comments to the Copyright Office and our lobbying efforts through the Coalition.

On March 21, 2017 DMLA filed additional comments to our original comments filed with the Copyright Office for the Section 512 Study. These comments included the results of an empirical research study that we conducted of our members and their contributors.

The Survey asked whether respondents monitor the Internet for copyright infringements of their or their contributors’ work, and examines their reasons for deciding whether or not to monitor and their experiences if they do monitor, specifically with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s (“DMCA”) notice-and-takedown procedure. We received over 1200 responses.

You can see the comments sent to the Copyright Office and the results to the survey here.

Bill would make selection process more effective and transparent and is critical to modernization of the U.S. Copyright Office

Washington, D.C. – March 29, 2017 – The Copyright Alliance applauded today’s approval of the Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act (H.R. 1695), which was passed by the House Judiciary Committee, as amended, by an overwhelming majority of 27-1.

According to Copyright Alliance CEO Keith Kupferschmid, “we commend Chairman Goodlatte, Ranking Member Conyers, and all who demonstrated vigorous and expeditious backing for this important piece of legislation, enabling it to be passed through committee with tremendous bipartisan support.”

“The Register of Copyrights is an extremely important position to the U.S. economy, creativity and culture, which should be acknowledged by making the role a presidential appointee subject to Senate confirmation – just as the head of the Patent and Trademark Office and so many other senior government officials are,” Kupferschmid continued.

“Making the Register a presidential appointee as provided in H.R.1695 will not only make the selection process more effective and transparent but it’s also critical to the continued modernization of the U.S. Copyright Office. The bill enjoys widespread bipartisan support and little opposition because of the narrow and modest approach taken and the tremendous support for a more transparent process for selecting the next Register of Copyrights. We look forward to continued support for this legislation and to its passage by the House in the near future.” said Kupferschmid.

**DMLA, along with the Coalition of Visual Artists, was very active in backing this legislation. Read here

Horrible news emanated from the Library of Congress on Friday morning when the notice of the firing of Maria Pallante was made public. This move is unheard of for the position of the US Register of Copyrights where historically the Register has stepped down or retired. Pallante was informed of her change in roles by being locked out of her computer.

Maria is a huge advocate for the rights of Creators and has been instrumental in the industry’s efforts for modernizing the Copyright Office and the creation of a Small Claim’s Court for Creators. She is seen as being fair and unbiased by all who know her.

This move by the the newly appointed Librarian of Congress, Carla Hayden, is seen by many as a line in the sand as to how the Library of Congress want creators to be treated. Here are a few articles on the firing. Look for more information here as this issue evolves.

Has your copyrighted work been used on the Internet without your permission?

Are you a photographer, illustrator, graphic artist or designer, or other visual creator?

Are you an artist’s/photographer’s agent or representative, or an image licensing agent?

Have you discovered infringing use of your images, or the images you license, on the Internet and used the DMCA Takedown Notice procedure to have the images removed from a website? If so, we’d like to know about your experience.

The US Copyright Office is conducting a study about the efficacy of the DMCA Takedown Notice procedure. The following group of associations are working together to conduct a survey of image rights holders and licensing professionals to gather information for the Copyright Office study.

Please help us in our advocacy efforts on behalf of all American visual artists and participate in our anonymous short survey.

March 2, 2016 – While there has been a great deal of discussion recently about the possibility of Congress creating a small claims process for visual arts, several visual artist groups, representing hundreds of thousands of creators, have joined forces to propose key components of potentially forthcoming small claims legislation. Collectively, the groups represent photographers, photojournalists, videographers, illustrators, graphic designers, artists, and other visual artists as well as their licensing representatives.

The white paper, which can be viewed here, advocates for the creation of a small claims tribunal within the U.S. Copyright Office. The document is a collaboration between American Photographic Artists (APA), American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP), Digital Media Licensing Association (DMLA), Graphic Artists Guild (GAG), National Press Photographers Association (NPPA), North American Nature Photography Association (NANPA) and Professional Photographers of America (PPA).

These organizations have identified the creation of a small claims option to be their most urgent legislative priority before Congress. They assert that the cost and burden of maintaining a lawsuit in the only existing venue for hearing copyright infringement claims—federal district courts—is prohibitive and all too often leaves visual artists no way to vindicate their rights. They see a small claims process within the Copyright Office as providing a fair, cost-effective and streamlined venue in which they can seek relief for relatively modest copyright infringement claims.

This negotiated document, which lays out the basic framework for small claims legislation, is in large part consistent with the legislative recommendations set out in the “Copyright Small Claims” report released in late 2013 by the U.S. Copyright Office. In some instances, the white paper offers alternative suggestions to those put forth by the Copyright Office.

Nancy Wolff, DMLA Counsel, has been an active participant in this process “DMLA stands with the visual artist community in support of the Copyright Office’s initiative to create an alternative to Federal Court to address copyright claims of lesser value. The licensing industry depends upon affordable and effective enforcement of copyright to reduce the use of unlicensed imagery, and this creates a path to increased licensing compliance and respect for copyright.”

The visual artists’ organizations listed above have now distributed this legislative proposal for a copyright small claims tribunal to members of Congress, the United States Copyright Office, the members of the undersigned organizations, and other important copyright stakeholders.